Green Solutions: A Strategy for Steve Daines

A strategy for Steve Daines....

Oppose TPP, cut military spending by half, close down NATO, and the Death Penalty for Monsanto, expand Medicaid to everyone who wants it


by Paul Stephens

My "tribe", such as it is, supports Steve Daines and is virulently anti-Baucus, and to a lesser extent, Tester - basically, anyone who answers to the Zionist-Bankster-Democrat-Machine, AKA the Military-Industrial-Congressional-Prison-Complex,  AKA the National Security/Warfare State.

Since the Zionist-banksters.... already control Baucus and nearly every Democrat, they're focusing on his would-be replacement, Representative Steve Daines.  And they're not liking what they see. He doesn't even seem to support the Conservative Christian take on the Middle East, let alone the Zionist policies for it.  He probably even has some pro-Palestinian friends, and he listens to them.  It isn't hard to convince a rural Montanan that the "Jewish Bankers" are responsible for most of our ills.   

As someone who made $30 million developing  a solid company in the intensely competitive internet markets, Daines is no fool (even though his advisers often make him sound like one).  I mean, what were they thinking, having him vote to cut food stamps when people are literally starving in the streets?  Does he KNOW anyone on food stamps?  Or is he like Mitt Romney, who wouldn't want any poor people to vote for him in any case?  I don't think he'll make that  mistake again, or use the nonsensical, absurd ALEC arguments for such policies.  ("We're punishing them for their own good, to make them self-reliant Jeffersonian Federalists.") 

What, then, does Daines favor?  He's obviously supporting more subsidies and "security" for the agribiz monopolies and corporate "family farms" (now that nearly all the smaller, non-corporate ones are gone.  Hey, it's money isn't it?)  Apparently, he thinks that government is just another business, and can't "lose money" on anything.  Even Medicaid, I've found (Democrats?), forces you to sign an agreement to PAY BACK whatever your cut-rate services have cost if you come into some money, or happen to die with a house or other fungible  assets (which you have to report, and they can only be minimal if you are accepted by Medicaid in the first place).  This is the notorious "spending down" to even qualify for our wretched health care system for the poor.  

He votes against Obamacare and Medicaid expansion (actually, it was the Supreme Court which struck the Medicaid expansion down, while approving the compulsory purchase of private insurance - something that is clearly illegal and unconstitutional) saying they are both "too expensive".  The ACA certainly is, since it's mostly corporate welfare and bailing out the insurance and other bankster rackets, but Medicaid is the cheapest health care we can buy!  Every person on Medicaid saves the taxpayers as well as insurance purchasers a ton of money.  Yet, our "legislators" make it almost impossible to get, or actually use.  You don't want those people in the insurance pool, or controlled by any other middlemen.  You want to provide them with basic healthcare at the least cost.  Aren't Republicans supposed to be in favor of this?  

The answer is Single Payer or "Medicare for All" (who want it, anyway - if you want to pay 4 times more through an "insurance" scam, that's your business).  It needn't even be as good as Medicare, although it easily could be.  It seems we'll always have a "2-tier" (or multi-tier) health care system.  Fine.  But let's have something basic, useful, and necessary, easily accessible by anyone for any reason.  That's what medicine is supposed to be, not an extortionist protection racket demanding not only everything you have, but everything you might earn in the future to pay for their usually poor and mis-directed treatments and prescriptions.  And if you refuse to pay, you will be refused treatment.  

The "official" Republican line has always been to protect the wealthy from the needs of the less fortunate or those otherwise incapable of providing for themselves, but somehow, they tricked the Democrats into actually implementing it as Pres. Obama's "signature" system - and then refused to support it, calling it "socialism".  Daines won't win any popularity contests or elections by opposing Medicaid or any other sane, market-driven solutions for basic social problems, like SNAP benefits.  The real libertarians like Milton Friedman have long supported a guaranteed annual (or monthly) income - that in place of all the other "services" which the Welfare State is supposed to provide.  And vouchers for other "public goods" like health care and education.  That's what Medicare is - a voucher system.  But the Republicans only talk about giving people vouchers to buy "health insurance", which is a racket.  It's not a real voucher system at all.   

Perhaps Daines actually favors the real fascist solutions - a national mobilization WPA, guaranteed jobs and incomes for everyone, and a National Health Service (single-provider, instead of  single-payer)?  Although many Republicans talk about ending Single Provider public education, and replacing it with vouchers, they're  reasons are always suspect (since Milton Friedman, anyway).  They don't want more freedom, diversity, and choice.  They want to minimize the amount of tax dollars spent on lower-income people.  A really Dickensian view, derived from Original Sin and the need to discipline and control the "rabble."  

If you really think the government can solve our problems, then fascism is the correct policy for a crisis like we are facing, now.  And that goes along with the massive military budgets and perpetual foreign wars of ideology and conquest which Republicans seem to favor, except when they have to pay for them, not to mention the CIA, NSA, and a dozen other "National Security" agencies which together cost $100's of billions a year.  

There are a lot of these folks in Montana, and they either vote Republican (pro-life, anti-welfare), or don't vote at all - especially after Tester, who proved to be an even more naive and cowardly corporate stooge than Baucus (but of course Baucus went to Stanford - which teaches character and perseverence, unlike the old College of Great Falls which was then an independent liberal arts school in the Catholic tradition). First, he promoted Vilsack as Secretary of Agriculture (an ex-Monsanto guy) and then tricked the corporate "environmentalists" (Democrats all) into supporting his "compulsory logging" scheme (at a rate higher than anything the old "free market" loggers ever wanted to cut, or were able to sell at a profit), and to make further "partnerships" with any and every "resource company" which wants to pillage our treasures at a return to Montana of - literally - a penny or two on the dollar.  That's Schweitzer, too.  That's where he made his personal modest fortune (Saudis and Libya, working for a Swedish agri-biz company), and he's not going to turn on them, now.    

Basically, they're all fighting over the loot, and as looters, they want to maximize that "pot" they're fighting over.   But the "take" has fallen to half or less of what it used to be - except for those bribes categorized as "campaign contributions," which continue to increase at double-digit rates - even faster than inflation (which is running at well over 10%/year since 2008, which they don't tell us, either).  They're all in on the corporate campaign to end constitutional government and the Rule of Law (the universal, timeless law - not the "laws" and "decisions" which our  stupid and corrupt "legislators" and judges waste our time and resources passing at the behest and active participation of corporate lobbyists like ALEC).  Worse, they take themselves seriously, and then insist on enforcing the unenforceable and harmful rules to benefit of the Prison Industry and the rest of the totalitarian, "liberal" state. 

Welcome to Fascist America.

Perhaps the only reason that Democrats continue to be elected at all is that they have the support - usually - of the arts and entertainment community.  Daines isn't the usual sort of Yahoo Republican, disdaining higher culture and favoring soft rock, country, violent movies and TV, soap operas, etc.  Tester almost certainly won the first time because of Pearl Jam, and even though they gave him little support the second time, people still associate him with various liberal and progressive causes like AERO, food safety, etc.  The margin is very slim, and with Democrats moving ever-further to the right, it seems logical for the Republicans to "re-brand" themselves as the party of hip culture mavens.  

Here's a guide to the Democrat Stronghold in Missoula, and what those voters might be looking for in a Senator to  replace  Baucus - a summary of arts events in the Missoula area from the Missoula Independent.  http://missoulanews.bigskypress.com/missoula/time-of-our-lives/Content?oid=1919037

Obviously, no one is going to win the Senate without getting a larger share of the student and elderly votes, as well as the wealthy and "pro-business" voters in Missoula (which is actually surrounded by extreme right-wing majority districts, and is also home to the most Libertarians and people who would vote Green if we could find any good candidates willing to run). 

Compare this to Great Falls, for example, which is certainly as much "Daines Country" as Bozeman or Billings.  For the Electric City, all you have to do is be pro-coal and pro-nukes - weapons as well as power generation.  And wrap it all in the flag of "national security" and "support the troops," right?  

But Daines is at a real disadvantage, here, for not having been in the military, and he knows it.  And that's why the Democrats first thought was  Lt. Gov and Col. Walsh, who was in command of the whole Montana National Guard before being drafted by Gov. Bullock as his running mate.  No matter how much of a war-hawk one might pretend to be, there's no substitute for actually having been there, and seen the atrocities and dehumanization which war necessitates.  

It's not that we're the bad guys and they're the good, or vis versa.  War, itself, is bad - self-perpetuating, and like a cancer in that it consumes all the healthy economy and resources around it.  But until the war is fought on American soil, we have a hard time convincing anyone that we're the good guys - especially when we tend to start wars, and support the wealthiest and least-responsible elements in our "interventions,"  who are busy raping and killing nuns, peasants, labor unions, small business people, and other self-help development and welfare organizations.  That stuff can only go on in secret, and Democrats and Republicans alike, with few exceptions. have supported it before Wikileaks and Snowden, who finally exposed the real dimensions and costs of these "foreign aid" programs promoted by the arms merchants and suppliers/contractors who feed on war and destruction.  

It's time for major party candidates to come out in support, if not of Assange (that renegade Austrialian, lawless in his whole life experience), at least of American Citizens Manning and Snowden, who acted for the highest patriotic motives, and who just might have saved our country, and the kind of constitutional citizen government we have long wished for, if not actually experienced. The Democrats have been lined up from the start in actually suggesting outright assassination to "protect national security" from "spies" and "traitors" like Manning and Snowden.  So it's a slam-dunk for Republicans - especially conservative ones - to lead the charge in defending these great patriots from the "godless liberals" who have no ethics or sense of higher law.  

=========

Here's some more on this topic from Project Censored, one of the most respected investigative jounalist enterprises, using  J-schools  and students like we do at the UM Journalism School and other alternative media projects.

Trans-Pacific Partnership a Corporate Coup D’Etat

http://www.projectcensored.org/trans-pacific-partnership-corporate-coup-detat/

On November 13, 2013, Wikileaks published a section of a trade agreement called the Trans-Pacific Partnership Treaty, or TPP. On the surface, the treaty is meant to facilitate trade between the twelve potential member countries: Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States, and Vietnam. However, there are a number of red flags surrounding the agreement.

Eight hundred million people, and one-third of all world trade, stand to be affected by this treaty, and yet, only three people from each member nation have access to the entire document. Meanwhile, 600 “corporate advisers,” representing big oil, pharmaceutical, and entertainment companies, are involved in the writing and negotiations of the treaty.

The influence of these companies is clear, as large sections of the proposal involve corporate law and intellectual property rights, rather than free trade. Corporations could gain the ability to sue governments not only for loss, but prospective loss. At the same time, patents and copyrights would see more protection. This means longer patents, leading to less access to generic drugs, and a lockdown on Internet content.

Though the Wikileaks exposure was followed quickly by an anti-TPP push in Congress, what is perhaps the most disconcerting is lack of coverage in corporate U.S. media. Japan, Australia, and even Russian media discuss the TPP openly, while American news sources remain silent even as the Obama administration attempts to fast-track it through Congress.

Sources:

Zachary Keck, “Congress May Have Just Killed the Trans-Pacific Partnership,” The Diplomat, November 18, 2013, http://thediplomat.com/2013/11/congress-may-have-killed-the-trans-pacific-partnership/

John Robles, “The TPP Is a Corporate Coup D’état – Kristinn Hrafnsson,” Voice of Russia, November 15, 2013, http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_11_15/The-TPP-is-a-corporate-coup-d-tat-Kristinn-Hrafnsson-5798/

John Robles, “Trans Pacific Partnership is Like SOPA on Steroids – Kristinn Hrafnsson,” Voice of Russia, November 23, 2013, http://voiceofrussia.com/2013_11_23/Trans-Pacific-Partnership-is-like-SOPA-on-steroids-Kristinn-Hrafnsson-1552/

“Secret Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP),” Wikileaks, November 13, 2013, https://wikileaks.org/tpp/

Shannon Tiezzi, “The TPP’s Not Dead Yet (But It’s Close),” The Diplomat, December 7, 2013, http://thediplomat.com/2013/12/the-tpps-not-dead-yet-but-its-close/

Student Researcher: Dylan Scherpf (Frostburg State University)

Faculty Evaluator: Andy Duncan (Frostburg State University)


=============

Bankers Back on Wall Street Despite Major Crimes

http://www.projectcensored.org/bankers-back-wall-street-despite-major-crimes/

A story that spans a decade has come to an unfortunate, but not surprising, end. Three former General Electric bankers, Dominick Carollo, Steven Goldberg and Peter Grimm, had been convicted in 2012 for rigging auctions of municipal bonds, thus stealing from projects to build schools, hospitals, libraries and nursing homes in virtually every U.S. state.

However, in November 2013, those convictions were reversed on a technicality: basically, that federal prosecutors took so long to build the massive case that the statute of limitations ran out. The three men were released from prison the next day—just in time, as a defense attorney sanctimoniously noted, to be home for Thanksgiving dinner.

These men were part of a decade-long scheme that bilked cities and towns of funds for public-works projects by paying kickbacks to brokers and manipulating bids. Between August 1999 and November 2006, Carollo, Goldberg and Grimm participated in countless rigged bids via telephone. Like Mafiosi, they used a secret language and code words to keep their underground business low-key. Prosecutors accumulated over 570,000 recorded phone conversations that directly linked the men to fraudulent activity. Evidence at trial established that they cost municipalities around the country millions of dollars.

This type of white-collar immorality is a major issue because the money stolen could have been used by cash-strapped towns to provide essential services. Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone called this fraud the equivalent of robbing a church fund to pay for lap dances. Taibbi, however, is one of the few reporters to consistently inform the public on these crimes and to point out the perhaps-insurmountable obstacles faced by even an activist U.S. Justice Department in getting convictions. “It really is hard to put these guys away,” Taibbi writes. “It’s even harder to keep them there.”

Sources:

Max Stendahl, “Former GE Execs Freed From Prison After Convictions Nixed,” Law360, November 27, 2013, http://www.law360.com/articles/492222/former-ge-execs-freed-from-prison-after-convictions-nixed.

Matt Taibbi, “Another Batch of Wall Street Villains Freed on Technicality,” Rolling Stone, December 4, 2013, http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/another-batch-of-wall-street-villains-freed-on-technicality-20131204

Additional Sources:

Matt Taibbi, “The Scam Wall Street Learned From the Mafia,” Rolling Stone, June 21, 2012, http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-scam-wall-street-learned-from-the-mafia-20120620

Chad Bray, “Three Sentenced in Bid-Rigging Case,” The Wall Street Journal, October 18, 2012, http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10000872396390444734804578064903311016908

“Three Former Financial Services Executives Convicted for Roles in Conspiracies Involving Investment Contracts for the Proceeds of Municipal Bonds,” United States Department of Justice, May 11, 2012, 
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/May/12-at-620.html

Bob Van Voris, “Ex-GE Bankers Win Reversal of Convictions for Bid-Rigging,” December 2, 2012, Bloomberg, 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-02/ex-ge-bankers-win-reversal-of-convictions-for-bid-rigging.html

Student Researcher: Markisha Barber (Frostburg State University)

Faculty Evaluator: Andy Duncan (Frostburg State University)



Posted by Paul Stephens at 12:11 PM  
Labels: Banksters, Baucus, Daines, Greens, Libertarians, Missoula arts, Project Censored, Senate race, TPP

Open Letter to Montana Democrats

An Open Letter to the Montana Democrats

I started this letter last January, with the following comment to my old friend Bill Stryzich on Facebook.

"Whenever you start opposing more coal development, tar sands, etc. and stop agreeing with Republicans and ALEC on the "need" for more laws, more prisons, more wars, and more "Homeland Security," I might vote for some of you guys. Right now, you're worse than Republicans - taking our votes under false pretenses.

Another thing: where were you guys when the Republicans repealed our medical cannabis law, approved by 62% of the voters? Or any of the other ALEC stuff they rammed through which targets not only the environment, but all environmentalists and environmental sustainability? Started by the "prison industry," ALEC is largely responsible for the $trillion+ costs of the War on Drugs. Until you dump Baucus and the bankster-Pharma drug cartels (and that absurd Obamacare, which actually bails out the drug and insurance cartels instead of expanding health care), you have no hope. I've been campaigning against ALEC since 2002, and all the Democrats except Steve Doherty claimed they never heard of it until it came out that they were "anti-union" and behind all the stuff in Wisconsin and Ohio last year."

Fast forward to the present

Every major Democrat in Montana now supports the Canadian Tar Sands project and the associated Keystone XL pipeline, which will run through Montana.  Only a few Native American Democrats oppose it.  This is considered to be the most environmentally destructive project in history.  It will mark the end of all efforts to prevent a major climate change catastrophe.  It will dig up and destroy thousands of square miles of sensitive arctic habitat.  And it produces at least twice the CO2 per unit of delivered energy of any other source.  
Most of you still support more coal leasing and development - even those endorsed and coached by the Montana Conservation Voters, which really is now "a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Democratic Party" - thanks to Ben Graybill, Aart Dolman, and other functionaries who refused to endorse Green Party candidates when we had them. 

Medical MJ was at least 1000 FTE taxpaying jobs - some said a $1 billion industry in Montana - others put it at $800 million, but that's using multipliers and such, which are often misleading or false.  When the Republicans talk about "job creation," why don't you remind them of this?  Nevertheless, the main benefit was that it decriminalized the lives and lifestyles of 50,000 or more Montanans,  and was a major step towards total marijuana decriminalization - something which already exists in 5 states and most foreign countries.  Plus, it took a big bite out of the "prison industry" lobby, which is well on the way to consolidating our police state one-party system envisioned by Karl Rove and the other Neocons. Even more important, it reduced the costs of health care, and established the right to self-medicate, and use the treatments which are cheapest and most efficaceous, independent of the legalized drug cartels. 

Gov. Schweitzer could have saved the Democratic party for the next 10 years with a simple veto. He dropped the ball. And I'm not sure Steve Bullock wouldn't have done the same, after repeatedly refusing to apply consumer protection laws to medical services and  hospital rates and prices, which are anywhere from 4-10 times higher than they should be.  The late Joe Mazurek single-handedly destroyed the health care system in Great Falls, approving a corporate takeover of our two charitable, locally-owned and controlled hospitals to create a monopolistic monster which has resulted in the deaths of dozens of people and firing anyone who opposed it, while doubling the costs.  This was in opposition to 95% or more of the doctors, patients, donors, and the general public who relied on them.  He even told us "the fix was in", and nothing we could do or say would prevent it. 

On the House Debate last night, "Obamacare" was a big topic, with Ms. Gillan defending it, and Mr. Daines opposing it.  As we in Montana well know, it should be called "Baucuscare" because it was his Finance Committee which stacked the deck and rammed it down our throats in the form of a multi-trillion dollar bailout of the bankrupt insurance companies and Pharma monopolies, which are pushing drugs now at unprecedented rates.  Since the Clinton Administration, they have pumped billions into the corporate media with direct consumer advertising to "ask your doctor for Drug X".  The main effect is to steer editorial policy in favor of these monopolies and against publicly-financed healthcare systems.  And the cost of this advertising (reflected in their monopoly pricing) is many times the R&D costs which they use to justify their outrageous prices.

In fact, most of the R&D is already paid for by the NIH, public universities, and independent research labs like McLaughlin in Great Falls.  What the Pharma monopolies pay for is the FDA-mandated testing protocols, which now average more than half a BILLION dollars for any new drug.  Drugs already approved and tested in Europe or Asia are not allowed to be imported, and that testing must be repeated (at maybe 10 times or more the cost) by the American manufacturer or licensee.  All of this "regulation" (which the Republicans pretend to oppose) is at the behest and under the control of those being regulated - something which any Libertarian knows, or should know, but Democrats and Republicans strenuously deny.  Yet, we heard no mention of that from the Libertarian candidate in the debate.

In fact, in the Congressional debate last night, they didn't even talk about health care.  It was all about "insurance," as though private, for profit insurance companies have anything to do with health care, except to make it much more expensive and restricting access to it.  They mean to further "regulate" the insurance companies so that they don't make so much money, or actually have to pay more than their already bloated premiums will cover.  Good luck with that. 

At the time the ACA was passed, Rep. Rehberg (who seems to have some fairly astute advisers) warned that it does nothing to reduce health care costs, which average 4 times higher in real terms (% of GDP) than any other country, while producing the worst health care outcomes in the developed world.  Sen Tester endorsed Single Payer in his primary campaign 6 years ago.  On that basis, Paul Richards dropped out of the primary, thus giving Tester a victory over his insurance-regulating opponent, Morrison.  

So what did Tester do, then?  He went to the K-Street bill mills and got big donations from the insurance and Pharma lobbies (not necessarily the lobbyists, themselves, but the lawyers who collect the contributions and distribute them to "deserving" candidates), which have controlled Sen Baucus to the extent that he pretended never to have even heard of a Single Payer system.  Most who supported Obamacare originally did so on the promise that there would be a "robust public option" - Medicare for anyone who wanted it, which would be financed by a 7% payroll tax, and free, like Medicaid, to low-income and the unemployed.  Ironically, this would have saved the private insurance "industry" as well, by shifting all the high-risk patients to the public system.  But monopolies want it all.  We all remember how Baucus had national leaders for Single Payer arrested and removed from his hearings, which consisted of nothing but AMA, Hospital Association, and insurance lobbyists and spokespeople.

The only Montana Democrat who supported Single Payer and continues to oppose Obamacare is Gov. Schweitzer.  This was reported, if at all, as being "off-message" when he introduced Pres. Obama and Sen. Baucus in Belgrade, when they were doing a PR tour in support of the ACA.

Now, Democrats, do you really think we have no memories?  Do you really think we're going to vote for Tester, Gillan, or Bullock once, again?  Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.  You had an excellent, winning candidate in Franke Wilmer - far wiser and more experienced than Ms. Gillan, but the Machine had selected one of it's own, Ms. Gillan.  

Sen. Tester has all the advantages of incumbency, but having betrayed his core constituencies of environmentalists with his absurd "pay off the timber industry and resource lobbyists and unions" bill (Forest Jobs and Recreation Act); seniors and low-income people by voting for the Insurance and Drug Monopoly Bailout Bill (ACA); and finally, and most egregiously, supporting AIPAC and its many vendettas against Islamic and oil-producing countries, he is now actually trailing his opponent - a man who was once the laughing-stock of the House of Representatives. Remember the "Don't help people with AID's.  Just let them die?"  statements of Rehberg?  I wonder why the Tester campaign didn't dredge them up?  And Tester had the effrontery, when still President of the Montana Senate, to vote for the Republican "Defense of Marriage Act" which made gay marriage illegal!  Unbelievable. 

These votes reflect the views of the majority of Republicans in the House and Senate, today.  Just let the poor die.  Turn them over to religious charities.  Let them pray for salvation.  Don't fund anything.  Let the states take care of it  - even though it was the Federal Government which let the corporations steal us blind.  And Tester seems to agree with that.  He is not for state sovereignty.  He is for more military spending.  He is for more wars.  He just voted, with 91 other Senators, to support Israel if it attacks Iran.  

And worst of all, as an organic farmer, he isn't even opposing or asking for hearings to investigate Monsanto, Cargill, and the other agribusiness monopolies and their role in foreign policy and the phoney "free trade" legislation sponsored by Baucus to force other countries to buy our contaminated food.  Monsanto lobbyists and former executives totally control the Obama Department of Agriculture.  When I told his local ag staff person in Great Falls that there were two Cargill heirs in Montana, each worth $4 billion, and that they were influencing agriculture policy, he claimed never to have heard of them.  A couple of weeks later, he was fired.  Nice job, Democrats!

I can assure you that there are millions of Americans, all former Democrats, who will never vote for a Democrat, again - no matter what sort of ogre the Republicans might run against you.  We have many alternatives - the main one being just to stay home.  And in Montana, the major Republican candidates are very respectable and well-regarded in their local communities. They will win by default. At least we will know who the bad guys are, and not have our votes for Democrats on our conscience.

--------------------

The first debate between Bullock and Hill wasn't even televised.  It was supposed to be about  "health care", with Bullock presumably defending Baucus-Obamacare.  I haven't looked for an on-line broadcast of it, or if it is archived on either MT PBS or MT public radio.  They certainly haven't been promoting it, if it was.  Why isn't it on Channel 21-5, the Helena PBS channel which covers all sorts of local government and legislative programs?  Don't tell me no one recorded it, or that it just isn't "available."  

Since the League of Women Voters quit running the debates, and third-party candidates were excluded from the national ones, it has been simply another exercise in one-party, right-wing corporate rule.  No matter that Bullock opposed Citizens United.  He lost.  He gets brownie points.  And he totally negated that by supporting, almost simultaneously, the Keystone XL pipeline.  Is it because that oil is destined for China, and Bullock is a Maoist?  It wouldn't surprise me. 

The debate between Denise Juneau and her Republican opponent (a savvy former school principal, if I heard correctly) was covered by the commercial TV news as being exceptional (with only a couple of brief clips, of course).   Is that available for public viewing?  I happen to be a fan of Denise Juneau.  She has done more as Superintendent of Public Instruction than anyone I can remember, and as the first statewide Native American elected official, she will open the doors to many others who have been traditionally excluded.  

For Republicans (and many Democrats), of course, that's the problem.  More "uppity Indians" pushing for more Federal money and protection, plus restitution and repatriation of their property which was stolen systematically by federal military and executive action.  But Juneau has opposed the Republican No Child Left Behind, while being all too willing to take their money.  She could have done much better by simply opting out of it - of course, that's a legislative decision, but she would have had a lot of support in the legislature for that.  Most Republicans in Montana are against it, too, so that would have been an opportunity  to really assert Montana's independence from federal aid and federal control over our most vital public institutions - education.  Perhaps that's a battle which is already lost (especially at the higher education level, which has become nothing but a corporate boon-doggle to socialize the costs of education while privatizing all the corporate and military-industrial "benefits" of job training, research, and otherwise serving the Corporate State).

I'm especially bitter about this because it is the Democrats in Montana who destroyed our Green Party, which had all the answers -  many  of them the same as what more progressive Democrats from the past - Metcalf, Wheeler, and Jeanette Rankin (a socialist Republican) - stood for.  The Democrat Machine in Great Falls has not only destroyed the Green Party, but me, personally.  I've been fired, blacklisted, defamed, and constantly threatened with arrest or bodily harm, while my friends and relatives, or anyone dealing with me in any way has faced the same treatment.  It is McCarthyism of the Left (except that these aren't leftists - they're corporate military-industrial police state fascists).  And the Republicans are so corrupt and brainless that they take me for a Democrat, and subject me to the same treatment.  Worse, still, they reject all dialogue and discussion, free press and local public radio, or any other source of alternative information. 

The Obama Administration has "doubled down" on the Bush-established police state.  Just like Tester, his promises to repeal the Patriot Act, end the "War on Terror," and restore the Constitution have been eliminated from the Democrat's Platform as well as the historical record.  

The Zionist Occupation Government continues to demand more wars, more military spending, and attacks on any countries which criticize or even question the Zionist world domination agenda.  And the Republicans continue to promote a one-party state as the vision of Karl Rove, who should be in prison along with a dozen or more other top Bush Administration officials.  Obama and all the Democrats in Congress except for Kucinich and Woolsey (both of whom are done, now) refused to hold hearings leading to impeachment and prosecution of these many war criminals.  They have destroyed our country, and the Obama's and Baucus's have supported them all the way.  I've been telling you for 10 years that if you want a real Democratic Party, you must get rid of Baucus  and his ilk, and especially the Wall Street and K-Street gangsters who fund and control them. 

Thank you for your time and attention.